Tom Oehser wrote on Friday, July 12, 2002 4:21 PM:> I chose the name bz2bzImage and have been using it on tomsrtbt since2.0.0,> the reason I chose it was to make as clear as possible that it is still a> big/compressed image and that the bz2 is additional/different. I get alot> of confusion from users who assume that bzImage *already* has something todo> with bzip2. I tried to convey that it was a "Bzip2-Big-Compressed-image"> rather than a "normal" "Big-Compressed-image". I still prefer it toeither> bz2Image or bzImage.? or bzip2Image. But I don't really care.

Fine, I am just working on a new version of the patch, where the make target'bz2bzImage' disappears. The kernel compression will be a CONFIG option,too. This is possible, because in the original patch you only changed'misc.c' to support bzip2. I will release the new version of the patchwithin this week (I hope).

The ramdisk compression is already a CONFIG option. You can choose betweengzip/bzip2 ramdisk compression, or you can even select both.

> Note, I have gotten it to work fine with a 4MB machine on 2.2.x, so 2.4.x> will probably work on 4MB also in some smaller kernel configurations.Also,> the speed penalty was not problematic even on 486 machines. See my post a> few months ago for details. But, overall, it is fine on an 8MB 486, and I> think it is useful enough in embedded and floppy and flash environmentsthat> it would be worthwhile.

Kernel 2.4 is much bigger than kernel 2.2. With very small configurationsthis should work on 4MB machines as well. You have to try. My kernel was580kB bzip2 compressed, this one didn't work on 4MB.

> Does your mod of my patch support configuring the normal vs. "small"option?> Also, does it support choosing the compression-level-number? Does itsupport> using gzip/bzip2 one for the kernel and the other for the ramdisk ineither> combination? My original patch was only "small", disabled gzip, and Ithink> used "-9" compression for both the kernel and the ramdisk.

Choosing a compression level is (still) not supported, but choosing anycombination of gzip/bzip2 is already implemented. I wonder if it is usefulto have compression-level-numbers? The patch uses '-9' compression in anycase (gzip/bzip2 kernel/ramdisk).